Kenneth Michael Ciccarelli v. County of Riverside et al
Kenneth Michael Ciccarelli |
County of Riverside, William Stokes, Michael Schmidt, Paul Verostek and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive |
5:2023cv02390 |
November 22, 2023 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Shashi H Kewalramani |
Sunshine Suzanne Sykes |
Civil Rights: Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 12, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 14 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 with JURY DEMAND filed by Defendants County of Riverside, Michael Schmidt, William Stokes, Paul Verostek.(Jones, Caylin) |
Filing 13 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendants County of Riverside, Michael Schmidt, William Stokes, Paul Verostek, (Oyster, Nathan) |
Filing 12 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Nathan A. Oyster counsel for Defendants County of Riverside, Michael Schmidt, William Stokes, Paul Verostek. Adding Nathan A. Oyster as counsel of record for County of Riverside, William Stokes, Michael Schmidt, and Paul Verostek for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by defendants County of Riverside, William Stokes, Michael Schmidt, and Paul Verostek. (Oyster, Nathan) |
Filing 11 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to County of Riverside answer now due 1/12/2024; Paul Verostek answer now due 1/12/2024; William Stokes answer now due 1/12/2024; Michael Schmidt answer now due 1/12/2024, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by defendants County of Riverside; Paul Verostek; William Stokes; Michael Schmidt.(Attorney Caylin Jones added to party County of Riverside(pty:dft), Attorney Caylin Jones added to party Michael Schmidt(pty:dft), Attorney Caylin Jones added to party William Stokes(pty:dft), Attorney Caylin Jones added to party Paul Verostek(pty:dft))(Jones, Caylin) |
Filing 10 CIVIL STANDING ORDER by Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes. (iva) |
Filing 9 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Kenneth Michael Ciccarelli, upon Defendant County of Riverside served on 12/1/2023, answer due 12/22/2023. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Theresa Doe, County Clerk in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity (Steering, Jerry) |
Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants County of Riverside, Michael Schmidt, William Stokes and Paul Verostek. (jtil) |
Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (jtil) |
Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) |
Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes and Magistrate Judge Shashi H. Kewalramani. (jtil) |
Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Kenneth Michael Ciccarelli. (Steering, Jerry) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Kenneth Michael Ciccarelli, identifying County of Riverside, William Stokes, Michael Schmidt, Paul Verostek. (Steering, Jerry) |
Filing 2 DEMAND for Jury Trial filed by Plaintiff Kenneth Michael Ciccarelli.. (Steering, Jerry) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-36456091 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Kenneth Michael Ciccarelli. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Attorney Jerry L Steering added to party Kenneth Michael Ciccarelli(pty:pla))(Steering, Jerry) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.